Skip to main content

About your Search

20110101
20110131
SHOW
Book TV 145
Today 75
( more )
STATION
FOXNEWS 478
CNN 451
MSNBC 417
SFGTV 324
SFGTV2 323
CSPAN2 320
CSPAN 260
KQED (PBS) 159
WHUT (Howard University Television) 149
WETA 127
KGO (ABC) 125
WBAL (NBC) 125
WRC (NBC) 125
WJLA (ABC) 119
KNTV (NBC) 113
WMAR (ABC) 112
( more )
LANGUAGE
English 4588
Chinese 28
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 4,616 (some duplicates have been removed)
question, "should the united states give up on haiti?" ray. >> the question, i think, is posed in a moral sense, "should the u.s. do a particular, make a particular decision regarding haiti?" i don't think that is the way the question should be posed. "will the u.s. give up on haiti?" and i'm afraid that the answer may be that the u.s. over time, will tend to give up on haiti because the problems that it faces there and the reconstruction process dealg with an impoverished country with low levels of human capital and financial capital, given its tendency to move towards political division, ah, the insecurities there and the competing interests that we face around the world in a, in a period of physical retrenchment, i think will lead us, eventually, to more or less give up or to lose patience with haiti once again and see it fall back into a certain era of neglect. but i think there is, undernth, certn desire of the american people, a commitment by the patient diaspora, and hopefully the haitian people themselves, to come back from this terrible tragedy and, and continue forward. but the
military rebuffing the united states. it is a delicate dance. it gets into your area of diplomacy and stage craft. this gives the chinese the platform, the importance, so a lot of the bids can be done. hillary clinton, the secretary of state speech at the state department last week, it was a tough speech about democracy and human rights, china not living up to its full potential. we are going to hear more of that delicately put in the course of his remarks today. that is on the table in this relationship in a robust way. that is how this president is drying to define that relationship to push on democracy and human rights to resolve defense and economic issues. >> the interesting balancing act is president bush gave president hu just a lunch, not a full state dinner, not a full state visit largely because of the human rights question. this president is trying to do it with the panoply of the state visit the chinese really wanted. it is very, very important to them. apeterspearances count. >> right. >> but still have hillary clinton raise these issues but not enough to address the issues. il
with america, and by an open economic system championed by the united states of america. cooperation between our countries is also good for the world. along with our g-20 partners, we have moved from the brink of catastrophe to economic recovery. with our security council partners, we passed an are enforcing the strongest sanctions to date over iran's nuclear program. we have worked to reduce tensions on the korean peninsula. we have welcomed by's support for the referendum in southern sudan. -- have welcomed china's support for the referendum in southern sudan. in areas like those i have just mentioned, we will cooperate working partnerships and making progress that neither nation can achieve a long. in other areas, we will compete. a healthy competition that spurred both countries to innovate and become more competitive. that is the kind of relationship i see for the united states and china for the 21st century. that is the kind of relationship we advanced today. i am please we completed dozens of deals that will increase u.s. exports by more than $45 billion. from machinery to software, f
and the british army. these images suggest the war was a defense of the united states against british invasion because all of these episodes, held primarily of the last year of the war and a period in which the british are now mounting. but canadians remember what americans forget which is the war began in most rarely fought as an american invasion of canada. some canadians remember it very different format. they celebrate their victory in the war and i want to invite you if you are ever with a canadian do not stay the united states won the war of 1812, because they take it very seriously. i found this out -- i find this out of it, go through the border through passport control because they want to ask me why i am coming into canada, and i should have learned by now not to tell them the truth. [laughter] i tell them i'm there to do historical research come so of course the next question is what are you researching and then i make the mistake which is to say the war of 1812. well, this is going to keep me there for about another ten minutes. not that they are more suspicious of me but they just
their social security is being cut and they're having to pay more in taxes. so the united states is going to have to be frugal in its foreign policy. relief for the first time since the beginning of world war two. we have gone seven decades without really looking at the price tag in a way that we are going to have to. that is the first part. we will have to be for will. the public will stand for it something else. i also believe the united states will remain the world's only superpower. i don't think anybody else will take our place. lots of things in the world that if we don't do them, they will get done. if they don't get done, and i discuss these various things that the united states does, the world will be a worse place. all of us, not just americans will be poor and less secure. >> getting into some of the things that we are going to give up. that is where i would like to start which is one of the ways when you start using cost as a way of deciding what policies we should follow are not rather than what the threat is out there, something you're not going to do anymore. what are some
a lot of people are really looking to the united states as a model. furthermore, i don't think the rest of the world, it's not as though they're just gonna say, "okay, what does the united states wanna do? we're going to follow." they all have their own interests, their own powerful business groups, and they aren't just gonna lay down and agree to anything we set out on the table. i think the most important thing the united states do is try to get it's own regulatory system right, and of course we will learn from other countries, other countries will learn from us. we don't need uniformity in regulatn, what we need is good regulation, we need some comparability in regulation, but it's not as though we're gonna drop a set of regulations and europe, japan, the rest of the world will just follow. >> if they don't wanna follow the u.s. because of the mess the u.s. made, as you indicated, wouldn't they be also able to say, or in position to say, "you know what, u.s., you broke this thing. you go ahead and lead us into tryin' to fix it." >> well, again, they all have somewhat different system
chinese leaders. although there are some differences in interpretation and opinion about the united states and china about whether or not the relationship was suspended by china at the start of last year, i think we can agree that the military-military relationship has been once again restored. so this trip represents a step forward, an important one-and-one we trust will allow us to establish a stronger foundation for substantive changes. i'd like to take a few minutes to discuss its broader context and the shifting regional power dynamics in the asia-pacific region and the multifaceted and evolving u.s.-china relationship. >> the rise of asia and this may be perhaps appear bit of a cliche but i hope it's a cliche for a reason. the rise of asia is perhaps salient and center to the 21st century. it's the most dynamic region of the world today. today the asia-pacific region comprises over half the world's population trade between the united states and the asia-pacific economies are estimated at $1 trillion. the region is home to 20 ports. all allies are partners of the united states and asi
: please join us as we recite the pledge. i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. the speaker pro tempore: the chair will entertain up to 10 requests for one-minute speeches from each side. for what purpose does the gentleman from south carolina rise? >> i ask permission to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. wilson: mr. speaker, i am grateful to welcome the four new members of the south carolina delegation to the 112th congress. this past election, the voters of south carolina led their -- let their voices be heard. the message was loud and clear, limit spending with the largest republican south carolina delegation in over 130 years. the voters can rest assure the message was heard in washington. these four conservative, successful small business leaders were elected based on their principles. promises to reduce spending, limit government and attain fiscal responsibility will
you imagine that in the united states? we can't even get our mind around these concepts. and yet this is president hu jintao's china of today. now i sin veerly hope that as the president meets with, as president obama meets with president hu, human rights issues are going to figure most prominently in the discussion, and the white house has indicated some direction in that regard. but since i've been serving in congress, members of both sides of the aisle have boldly challenged on the ruthless treatment, and their families, internet freedom, religious minorities, and women and families victimized by a callus policy of coerced abortion. let's turn to economics. full estimate is that we owe about $2 trillion to china. we have a bilateral trade approaching $300 billion. of course, this pose weighty concerns. where appropriate, i believe we must challenge china to abandon the america thattism in the subsidies to contribute to this inbalance. i think we also must look ourselves in the eye in the united states. and take action to get our fiscal house in order. to revive our stagnant ma
the united states on some, you know, some broader political agenda. >> is the control over whether the conflict is globalized or not in the hands of the united states? >> it is in part. i mean, there are other actors also trying to globalize it, including some actors, affiliated with al-qaeda who would be very happy to see this become globalized. but the united states does have an important policy choice, i believe, in whether or not it treats conflicts in, say, somalia, but also ethiopia, eritrea, elsewhere in the horn of africa. as, we have to respond because this is an arena in a global struggle, or we can choose when it is we wish to respond, because in fact, this is mostly a, a horn of africa problem, has a horn--these conflicts are horn of africa problems, not global, uh, problems. >> dan simpson, what do you think? is the horn of africa the next afghanistan? >> i don't think so either. i agree with terrence. slightly different reasons, but first of all, the historical parallel doesn't hold. i mean, we went into afghanistan because it had served as the base for the 911 attack
spending. if you look at times when the united states was not spending a lot on the military, between world war i and world war ii, 10 years of that was the great depression which is not any kind of good indicator. since 1945 spending on the military has been consistently quite high. those american leaders who were responsible for the transition from world war ii to the peace that was supposed to follow where greatly concerned that they knew perfectly well that was the federal spending during wartime that pulled the country out of the depression. they ask themselves what happened when we pull the plug on the federal spending? are we going to go back into a depression? they were seriously concerned, and one of the measures they took to try to ensure that it did not happen was the embrace for the first time in a consistent and seriously by the american government i free trade. because they hearken back to the 1890s when it was a believe we've got to find foreign markets. the under-secretary of state for economic affairs, he went before congress and he said we can't forget how we're going to r
this evening to the former ambassador from china to the united states, zhou wenzhong. >> of course, what we hope is that we'll have relationship in which we will treat each other as equals. so in that sense, i think in the world, every country is equal. i know this is a very diverse world and diversity that makes the world so colorful. and countries, no matter the size of it, big or small, are all equal. >> rose: we continue our coverage of china in the united states with american businessman john mack who has made frequent trips to china to understand the chinese and look at mutual business opportunities. >> it wasn't until the early-- late 80s, early 90s they started making this huge conversion and changing their economy, so you can understand why they don't want to see outside companies come in and take control of some of their major businesses. they have to be cautious. but, at the same time i think if you build the sense of trust, communications, over time, some of the complaint that we have will go away. >> rose: we conclude our look at china and the united states with kenneth roth a
another united states of building stock according to most projections in the next 15 or 20 years. it's just a word on our complementary difference is and why to cooperate in think jon holdren has already spoken extremely articulate on this. i would just add a few additional thoughts on innovation the united states as a mature network of university national lab is in china. this is a growing national priority. just a couple of months ago minister and dr. holdren cochaired extremely productive conversations between the government on innovation policy. we have a lot to learn from each other. the two governments have not always seen completely eye to eye on innovation policy but they are a lot we can learn from each other and we have a lot of progress that needs discussion. in the credit markets there have been recent challenges in the united states. credit in china is abundant. capital markets are well developed here in the united states with venture capital and private equity. significant volumes of low-cost capital in china. so work here in the united states must lead replacing existi
it can afford. and i tell them this by way of explanation as to how is it that the united states during the 19th century, during the 18th century and the 19th century waged wars with only this generational frequency? and can the wars that it waged were not particularly large wars. the revolutionary war was, well, it became this large war, but the united states had a relatively small part in the fighting. the war of 1812 was almost a frontier war from the standpoint of the british empire. it was a war for the united states because the united states was a small country. the war with mexico, again, a war on the frontier. the civil war is the big exception to this rule, but it's exceptional in a lot of ways. but then the war with spain in 1898, the next war. this is, well, it begins as a skirmish in the caribbean. now, it winds up as a war that stretches all the way across the pacific, but that's part of the surprise. however, once you get to the 20th century, the united states engages in the greatest wars in human history, and after the second world war the wars come quite frequently. now,
with south korea, japan and the united states on the border. that's one thing. second, my view is that they absolutely enjoy the fact that the united states is pretty heavily dependent on them, at least perceptually to interact with north korea and that certain restraints in my view a lot of the state department's diplomacy against china, or for china. >> i think china could help with north korea, also. and i think their interest is very much on stability. that's what they want. and they worry that pressure on north korea not only could lead to the effect that mr. wortzel point out, but north korea, you could see them as any. north koreans talk about this quite often. but the net effect is what was the chinese do. i think they will seek their interest in school. at the situation looks like a will become very unstable, then they will intervene. and i think they did intervene in the case of the north korean provocation at the artillery barrage that killed several south koreans and the latter part of last year. and the u.s. has maintained to the north koreans that north korea's pr
tonight about a part of the world that should be a central focus of the united state, but still isn't yet. but as is often the case, elements of the u.s. military are ahead of the curve as to whether the trend of current events are headed. let me start with two things. we're all prisoners of the mercator projection, americans that is. the mercator projection is the world unfolded on a flat rock single fish as north america and south america in a center with the indian and pacific oceans confined to the edges and therefore to the edges of consciousness as well. what we see in the center and we are at the heart of everything. after all, the united state is in the atlantic pacific country. we have keyboards on the atlantic and the pacific. worsen the 21st century world war i, world war ii, vietnam all encompassed in one respect or another were either atlantic or pacific. and also, our whole outlook, you know, is that the atlantic and the pacific in the center. but what i'm here to say is that we have to focus on the third ocean, the indian ocean, which has been confined to the edges of our c
have taken about a year but there is 400 companies and the united states that supply material and oil in canada. finally, i think it was the governor from montana but said it best. i don't send my national guard to risk their lives to edmonton. they are in the middle east, and that is a strong argument, that is not the only argument we can make. it's got to be jobs, it's got to be improvement in the emissions and i think that's very important. .. because the conservative long-standing honorable interest in developing the north and asserting the canadian civilization goes right up to the north pole, but to make a picturesque and attractive to voters, he asserted, saying that there were pressing threats against canadian sovereignty in the north and b canada could ever defend unilaterally against those. quietly, that silly position has been modifying and the five years the prime minister has been the prime minister and american sailors are on canadian naval boats patrolling the north even the vicious norwegians are sometimes invited in and the terrifying russians. >> not the danes. >> ri
between mexico and the united states. the 2 countries' economies, cultures, and populations are intertwined, and increasingly, so are its militaries. mexico is reeling from a violent drug war that has claimed at least 30,000 lives since 2006. that's when mexican president felipe calderon called in the mexican army to take on the drug cartel. now, u.s. military advisors have started training their mexican counterparts. what more can and should the 2 countries do to combat the drug violence in mexico? andrew, in january 2009, the u.s. joint forces command said-- i'm going to read this--warned that "mexico is at risk of becoming a failed state because of its ongoing, vicious drug war." now, was that hyperbole? >> i think it was hyperbole. i mean, we're looking at a country that has several parts under severe stress. violence is concentrated in the northern border near the united states, the main drug transshipment routes into the united states; some port areas around acapulco and elsewhere; and a few transshipment corridors. but most of the country's fairly peaceful. it is, you
a part of the world that should be a central focus of the united states, but still is not yet. as is often the case, elements of the u.s. military are ahead of the curve. it .. also, our whole outlook is with the atlantic and pacific in the center. i am here to say tonight we have to focus on a third emotion. the indian ocean which has been consigned to the edges of our consciousness but is rising importance. another thing that we have all been prisoners of is we have all been prisoners of cold war era studies. at the end of world war ii america found itself a great power. a great world power and therefore it needed experts. area experts for each part of the world. artificially divided eurasia into the middle east, south asia, central asia, southeast asia, east asia pettersson university did this, think tanks did this, the pentagon did this, the cia and state department did this. is it is flowing together into one organic continue. the other and navigable land of inland data from the horn of asia to the indonesian archipelago and new york all the way to the see of japan. as i
are getting ready for a joint press conference between the president of the united states and hu jintao of china. there will be american journalists there. there will be chinese journalists there. already we've heard president obama make a public appeal for the universal rights of every human being. that's a reference to human rights developments in china. we'll be waiting to see whether that question comes up during the conversations. i think two questions on each side, from each country are going to be allowed. there will be translation. we will bring you all of that momentarily. but let me just tell you first of all what we are -- what we've been looking at. we did hear president obama talk about human rights. we've heard some comments from president hu jintao. the u.s. and chinese presidents are scheduled to take, as i said, two questions each in the news conference. that's going to start moments from now. and this follows a busy morning of pomp and private meetings beginning on the south lawn of the white house. president hu got the full treatment in vivid contrast to the last u.s.
. thanks to both of you for being with us. marc, is the united states safer today than it was ten years ago before 9-11? >> yes, i think it is. if you'd asked me that question five years ago, i probably would have said, "no." i think we made a lot of very damaging decisions in the years immediately after 9-11 but then in, in the second half of the bush administration, i think they corrected course and did a number of things that i think have made us a lot safer. i think we're doing much better now in the battle against al qaeda. al qaeda, i think, is much more marginal than it used to be to, uh, to mainstream arab politics and it's much less able to mobilize anger against the united states. >> what did the u.s. do in terms of changing policy during that, the second five years that you mentioned? >> i think it, it did a number of things. uh, it corrected course in what used to be called "the war of ideas." it did a much better job of focusing strictly and very specifically on violent extremists instead of focusing on islam more generally. and i think that that helped to reach out to the main
, both the leadership of the united states and the leadership of israel ignore directives that their own respective governments have put out regarding fatah. the israel ministry of foreign affairs outright calls fatah a terrorist organization. on the ministry's website, it states, quote, fatah is a terrorist organization as defined in the prevention of terrorism ordinance, end quote. just so you know, the ordinance provides the israeli government specific measures when dealing with terrorists and when protecting the security of its citizens. and has been in place for the past six decades. with regards to the united states, one has to do some research to find the terrorist designation of fatah. first and foremost, in december, 1987, then president ronald reagan signed into law the antiterrorism act of 1987. it states, quote, the congress determines that the plo and its affiliates are a terrorist organization and a threat to the interests of the united states, its allies, and to international law and should not benefit from operating in the united states, end quote. it further states that
to their own world. we think were at the heart of everything. after all, the united states isn't atlantic said that countries. our wars in the 21st century, and the 20th century, world war i, world war ii, korea, vietnam, all encompassed in one respect or another were either the atlantic or pacific oriented. and also, our whole outlook, you know, is in the center. but what i'm here to say tonight is we have to focus on a third ocean, the indian ocean, which has been consigned to the edges of our consciousness, but which is rising in importance. another thing that we've all been prisoners of his we've all been prisoners of cold war area study. at the end of world war ii, america found itself a great power, a great world power. and therefore, it need experts, area experts for each part of the world. so we artificially divided eurasia into the middle east, south asia, central asia, southeast asia, east asia. universities did this. think tanks tidbits. the pentagon did this. the cia and state department all did this. and when i'm here to say tonight is that these divisions are collapsing. it's all
countries? and we know the u.s. side has been saying the united states is willing to see a stronger and more prosperous china, so i would like to ask president obama that deep in your heart, do you really think that you can leave comfortably with a con stavently -- with a constantly-growing china and what do you think a china development really mean to the united states? [speaking in chinese]. . [speaking chinese] [speaking chinese] >> but like to take a question from the lady journalist for the exchanges between our two peoples represent the bases and driving force behind the growth of our relationship. the establishment of diplomatic relations between our two countries, we have seen more robust exchanges between the power of two peoples. in such exchanges also help cut the steady growth of our relationship. the statistics i have show that each year we have about 3 million people traveling between our two countries. in other words, on every single day, about 7-8 million people travel between china and the united states. this is something that is hardly conceivable 32 years ago when
had then -- the united states in particular -- turned it back on japan and said we will treat you no were betten we treat the chinese, this would have alienated the japanese. now, you have to be a little bit careful in the figuring out how to interpret this because, yeah, the japanese diplomats, japanese leaders said this will be an intolerable affront. who exactly were they speaking for? .. roosevelt did not want to antagonize the japanese. as roosevelt discovered, roosevelt was one of the strong advocates of annexation of the philippines. in 1898-1899 it seemed like a really good idea. what he did not appreciate was the american people were -- i might even say are -- essentially anti imperialists at heart. americans never, not from 1899 until 1946, never sufficiently garrisoned the philippines against potential attack. japan was the expansionist country in that part of the world so roosevelt by 1905 was describing the philippines, his term was our heel of achilles. it is all that gives us concern interrelationships with japan. it was an american colony but it was indefensible if
the president of the united states and never told that story or promoted himself on that. i want my son to have that humility, and barak obama is in the book, again, not because of political reasons. nobody knows where he will be in the end, but what he represents is one the greatest ideals in all america and that's that anyone can be president. i want my son to know and daughter to know that anyone can be president. they were put in there for nonpolitical reasons. >> how did you get to know george bush? >> i write thrillers and mysteries for a living which means i spend my day talking to imaginary people. i got a letter that said i like your books a lot, and it was written by george hw bush. i sent him free books, and he's been a good friend and helped me with research. >> first call on heros from maryland. go ahead please. >> caller: yes, brad, i want to thank you for creating such a wonderful book. i think it's extremely important that people really understand that, you know, heros are not just the people who are famous, but i liked that you have people who are not famous and kids have an op
and credit of the united states and that is irresponsible -- >> i think it is irresponsible if he refuses to sign a bill and country defaults. but it is his choice. >> but you think you cou do that when he has the bully pulpit? >> we are on the stage right now, a we? >> i am a local journalist. he has the bully pulpit. >> what we really do not like is runaway spending that bankrupting this country. we want to see the fiscal direction of thicountry change. e debt ceiling is a symptom of the fact that the fiscal policy is way off track. we want to do some things that it was pointed in the right direction as the debt ceiling increase occurs. the letter this morning said march 31-may 16. there is an effective time frame. nobody really knows the answer. it is ceipts and expenditures and things like this that are a little on forseen. we're not interested in a naked debt ceiling increase. >> ok, another issue that is likely to come up is the fcal position of the states. there are a lot of them, including major states, and very tough fiscal positions, big deficits, and there is a prospect one or
now you could argue nothing is more important to the united states than the economy and to the world. and china is leading this global recovery. >> can we talk quickly about the politics of distrust here? not just here in the united states. we saw the demonization of china on the campaign trail both by democrats and republicans. it was almost bipartisan. but there's also this distrust in china over what the u.s. government's motivations are here. are we trying to keep china in a box. that is something that hu is trying to manage and struggling with. >> he is trying to manage it but there are big questions about whether hu is really in charge. and the fact is that the chinese military now seems to be more dominant than the political civilian leadership and hu himself as party leader doesn't hold the same sway -- >> as we watch this arrival ceremony begin on the south lawn of the white house, we want to mention we're also joined by nbc's long-time pentagon correspondent jim miklaszewski as well as cnbc's chief washington correspondent john harwood. mik, as we watch this pomp and circum
classes. why do you think that is a less detrimental alternative to war for the united states? >> i think it depends on your attitude towards the competition. on the whole, it works better than other economic systems. i was a student in the soviet union. it stank. it is not a very good system, to be honest. ultimately, the channeling your desire and to building a new company and getting rich is ultimately -- it does not have to be capitalism. you can channel it into your local sports team. whatever. the more choices you get people anymore avenues in which to end that there naturally competitive instincts, the more people will fulfill that side of their nature. that is my basic point. >> i think a capitalist society generates more of those choices. >> a number of people on the panel seemed to suggest that there are a number of ways to replace violence into very banal activities. it is a sublimation of cruelty. we could talk about the banality of evil and the east to which we could inflate -- and the ease to which we could inflict -- he makes the case that we have this predilection to disco
] ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ [background sounds] [background sounds] ♪ >> ladies and gentlemen, the president of the united states and mrs. michelle obama. ♪ [playing hail to the chief] [background sounds] ♪ ♪ ♪ [inaudible conversations] [background sounds] [background sounds] [background sounds] >> ladies and gentlemen, the national anthem of the people's republic of china followed bit national anthem of the united states. ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ [background noise] [background noise] ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ [background noise] [background noise] [background noise] [background noise] [background noise] [background noise] ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ [background noise] [background noise] >> mr. president, this concludes the honor. >> thank you. [background sounds] >> good morning, everyone. president hu, members of the chinese delegation, on behalf of michelle and myself, welcome to the white house. and on behalf of the american p
will the outcome mean for america? >> the united states will continue to stand up for the rights of the egyptian people. >> we get the latest from secretary of state hillary clinton. and an exclusive interview with the egyptian ambassador to the united states. samed shoukry. live from cairo, a special "this week." "crisis in egypt" starts now. good morning. how often have we asked when will democracy come to this part of the world? and what will it look like? here we are in what looks like a massive tech tonic shift. first tunisia. now egypt. here, for the sixth straight day, tens of thousands of people are out on the streets. the military is arrayed on tanks and on foot. the question. will the army fired if ordered to do so? in the last ten minutes, we have heard and seen fighter jets buzzing tahrir square. where the crowds are. an enormous, alarming, incredible sound. they've been flying low. the protesters are still out there. they've been reacting. they're carrying slogans, chanting below me. despite the reforms that president mubarak has done, shuffling the government, the people are saying
relationship between the department of intense and the pla but between the united states and china. and it is important not just for the two nations, i would add, but for the future of growth, prosperity and stability of the entire region. we have an extraordinary opportunity to begin to define the relationship not by the obstacles that defied us or the issues that drive us apart but by the a opportunities that exist to foster greater cooperation and bring us close together. together the united states, and our partners in a specific region can help build a new century of stability and prosperity. thank you. [applause] >> michael, thank you for that speech. we have some type of question i'm going to take the liberty of the chair to ask the first one. is it fair to say with the secretary's visit to china next week and the talks last month the defense council to give talks last month that the bilateral security military to military cooperation discussions have moved beyond the issue of the u.s. arms sales to taiwan? >> i think it's fair to say that with secretary gates saw ' visit nex
, the secretary of the treasury of the united states ( applause ) >> thank you, charlie. and we will have an hour but i would like to also get your questions involved in this, and so let what he says resonate and we'll have an opportunity to include your questions. question per se-- some times define what's on the minds of people. so what are you hearing he recall at this conference? what do people want to know? >> you know, i haven't been here in several years, but it feels very different. obviously, it feels different. there's-- i think there's more confidence now that the most acute part crisis is behind us. absolutely in the united states, but i think even-- i think that's even true globally. and i've only been here for, you know, 24 hours. but what people have been asking me about are how is europe doing what about the u.s. and china? and how confident are you that the american political system will be up to the very substantial challenges we still face as a country? >> rose: i want to touch on all of those. tell me how confident are you that the american political system can look at the cha
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 4,616 (some duplicates have been removed)